Note For The Reader

Note for the Reader:
. I declare that this essay is work done as a part of the Part III Exami-
nation at the University of Cambridge under supervision of Professor
Coates. The essay states the primary aim as the generalization of the
Birch Lemma of Birch and Heegner about quadratic twists with prime
discriminants and those having any prescribed number of prime factors
but the majority of the high level mathematics involved in this lemma
required background knowledge more than taught or acquired at this
stage. The actual aim of essay was to understand the Conjecture of
Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer and the basic background related to the
problem. This essay is the result of my own work, and except where
explicitly stated otherwise, only includes material undertaken since the
publication of the list of essay titles, and includes nothing which was
performed in collaboration. The essay required explaining, for elliptic
curves defined over Q, the precise statement of the conjecture of Birch
and Swinnerton-Dyer, both in its weak and strong forms followed by
a discussion, without proofs, of the theorem of Kolyvagin-Gross Zagier
and the parity theorem of T. and V. Dokchister, and also some illu-
minating numerical examples in support of the conjecture. Then the
essay required to give an account, with detailed proof with explanation
where possible, of one of the results in the reference Quadratic twists
of elliptic curves (J. Coates, Y. Li, Y. Tian, S. Zhuai). The second ref-
erence Lectures on the Birch-Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture (J. Coates)
gives some background material for the first reference. Although not
up to date with the subsequent literature, Tates short article The arith-
metic of elliptic curves, as the third reference, was still a beautifully
simple and precise account of the conjecture.
1
THE CONJECTURE OF BIRCH AND
SWINNERTON-DYER
Abstract. This paper explains the precise statement of the Con-

jecture of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer, both, in it’s weak and strong
form, followed by a discussion of Parity Theorem of T. & V. Dokchis-
ter and the Theorem of Kolyvagin-Gross-Zagier. In addition, we
see illuminating numerical evidence in support of the conjecture
and give an insight to the Congruent Number Problem. The main
aim of this paper is generalizing the Birch Lemma of Birch and
Heegner about quadratic twists with prime discriminants and those
having any prescribed number of prime factors.
1. Elliptic Curves over Q

Let f (x, y) = 0 be a plane affine curve. Then the homogenization of
this curve into f¯(x, y, z) is defined by:
x y
f¯(x, y, z) = z deg(f ) .f ( , ).
z z
The points of C(f¯) with z 6= 0 correspond precisely to our original
affine curve. The points with z = 0 are called the points at infinity of
C(f¯).
Definition 1.1 (Projective Plane Curve). A projective plane curve is
defined to be the zero set of a homogeneous polynomial in the projective
plane P2 . It is of the form
C(f¯) = {f¯(x, y, z) = 0} ⊂ P2
Definition 1.2 (Singular Point). We say that P = (a : b : c) is a
singular point on C if all partial derivatives at P vanish.
If a curve C has no singular points, it’s called a non-singular curve.
A cubic can have at most one singular point. For if it has more than
one singular point, then the line passing through those two points on
cubic will have multiplicity 4 which is not possible.
Date: 28, April 2015.

2
THE CONJECTURE OF BIRCH AND SWINNERTON-DYER 3
Elliptic curves.
Theorem 1.3 (Falting). If C is a curve of genus g > 1 over Q. Then
C(Q) is finite.
For g = 0, either C(Q) = ∅ or C ' P1 . When g ≥ 2, Faltings
theorem tells us that #C(Q) < ∞. Our concern is the remaining case
g = 1. If C(Q) is a genus one curve and C(Q) = ∅, there isnt much
to do. Assume that C(Q) contains at least one point, say O. Such a
curve is called an elliptic curve, and usually we denote C by E for an
elliptic curve.
Definition 1.4 (Elliptic Curve). An elliptic curve over a field K is
a non-singular projective algebraic curve E of genus 1 over K with a
chosen base point O ∈ E.
Group Law. Let P, Q, R ∈ E(K) where K is a field and let O be the
base point. There exists a binary operation ⊕ on E(K) such that:
(1) P ⊕ Q = Q ⊕ P
(2) P ⊕ O = P
(3) If a line L meets E at points P, Q, R, then (P ⊕ Q) ⊕ R = O
(4) Given P ∈ E(K), there exists R ∈ E(K) such that P ⊕ R = O
(Then we write R = P )
(5) (P ⊕ Q) ⊕ R = P ⊕ (Q ⊕ R)
Therefore, (E(K), ⊕) is an Abelian Group.
Since elliptic curve is of genus 1 with a fixed base point O, by Rie-

mann Roch Theorem, we get the following Weierstrass form of the
elliptic curve over Q:
y 2 + a1 xy + a3 y = x3 + a2 x2 + a4 x + a6 where ai ∈ Q.
We can view an elliptic curve in projective plane with a homogeneous
equation
Y 2 + a1 XY Z + a3 Y Z 2 = X 3 + a2 X 2 Z + a4 XZ 2 + a6 Z 3
and one point at infinity (0 : 1 : 0). This is the only point of intersection
of E with z = 0 and we call this O. That is,
E(Q) := {(x, y) ∈ Q2 | y 2 + a1 xy + a3 y = x3 + a2 x2 + a4 x + a6 } ∪ {∞}
Discriminant and J-Inavriant of an Elliptic curve. We now de-
fine the discriminant and j-invariant of an elliptic curve. The non-
singularity condition just means that the cubic cannot have any cusps
or nodes. To ensure that the elliptic curve is non-singular, we must
have discriminant ∆E 6= 0.
4 THE CONJECTURE OF BIRCH AND SWINNERTON-DYER
Definition 1.5 (Discriminant). Let E be an elliptic curve over Q given

by the Weierstrass equation
y 2 + a1 xy + a3 y = x3 + a2 x2 + a4 x + a6 where ai ∈ Q.
Define
b2 = a21 + 4a2 , b4 = a1 a3 + 2a4 , b6 = a23 + 4a6 ,
b8 = b2 a6 −a1 a2 a3 +a2 a23 −a24 , c4 = b22 −24b4 , c6 = −b32 +36b2 b4 −216b6 .
Then the discriminant is given by
∆E = −b22 b8 − 8b34 − 27b26 + 9b2 b4 b6 .
Note: The discriminant depends on the choice of equations, and can
change after a change of variables.
Definition 1.6 (J-Invariant). We define the j invariant as the quantity

c34
j − invariant := .
∆E
Note: The importance of this definition comes from the fact that
over an algebraically closed field, two elliptic curves are isomorphic if
and only if they have the same j-invariant. It follows that any two
elliptic curves with the same j-invariant can be transformed into one
other by the change of variables. Thus, j-invariant is independent of
the change of variables and choice of equations.
Rank of an Elliptic Curve.

Theorem 1.7 (Mordell-Weil 1922). E(Q) is a finitely generated abelian
group.
Among finitely generated abelian groups, there is a way to measure
the size of the set even when it is infinite given by their Rank. The no-
tion of rank is a key ingredient in formulating the Birch and Swinnerton
Dyer Conjecture. By Mordell’s theorem we get:
E(Q) = Zr ⊕ E(Q)tor
where E(Q)tor is the torsion subgroup of E(Q). Then r is defined to
be the algebraic rank of the elliptic curve.
Definition 1.8 (Rank of an Elliptic Curve). Define the algebraic rank
of an elliptic curve E over Q as:
r = dimQ (E(Q) ⊗Z Q)
There is no proven algorithm guaranteed to determine rank(E). It

is not known exactly which integers can occur as the rank of an elliptic
curve. For the first question, there are algorithms for computing both
upper bounds and lower bounds for rank(E); with luck and enough
work, they might be equal. For the second, it is not even known if the
set of ranks of elliptic curves over Q is bounded.
Reduction modulo p. Consider a finite field Fp . Counting points on

Fp is easy because there are only a finite number of points.
Example 1.9. [12] Consider the curve:
E : y 2 = x3 + 11x + 17
We will look for points on E in the field F5 . We first consider the table
of square in F5
y y2
0 0
1 1
2 4
3 4
4 1
Next we consider the cubes and the right hand side of our defining
equation for E in F5
x x2 x3 + x + 2
0 0 2
1 1 4
2 3 2
3 2 2
4 4 0
Equating the left and right side of the equation of the elliptic curve, we
find there are four points in E(F5 ), and they are (1,2), (1,3), (4,0) and
O.
Thus, counting points on an elliptic curve is simple and relatively quick
in a finite field compared to the rationals.
We can ask, ’How big is E(Q)?’. Equivalently we can ask, ’How

many rational solutions are there to a non-singular cubic equation in
two variables with rational coefficients?’. The set E(Q) is related to
E(Fp ) as follows.
Definition 1.10 (Minimal Weierstrass Equation). Consider the Weier-

strass equation for E(Q)
y 2 + a1 xy + a3 y = x3 + a2 x2 + a4 x + a6 .
x y
Since replacing (x,y) by ( , ) causes ai to become ui ai , if we choose
u2 u3
u divisible by a large power of π (where π represents a uniformizer of
the ring of integers-here Z), then we find a Weierstrass equation with
all coefficients ai ∈ Z such that |∆| is as small as possible. This is
called the minimal Weierstrass equation.
Let Ẽ represent the reduced curve for the minimal Weierstrass equa-
tion
y 2 + a¯1 xy + a¯3 y = x3 + a¯2 x2 + a¯4 x + a¯6 over Fp .

Then the following cases arise:
(1) E has good (or stable) reduction over Q if Ẽ is non-singular.
It should be noted that p 6 |∆ is a condition for nonsingularity,
because otherwise ∆ would be reduced to 0. Thus, ∆ 6= 0.
We define Φ by:
Φ = {P = (x, y) ∈ E(Q)|P has finite order}
Then, we define the reduction modulo p map as:

(
(x̄, ȳ) if P = (x, y)
Φ → Ẽ, where P 7→ P =
Ō if P = O
Then Φ is a homomorphism and is an isomorphism if p 6 |2∆.

(2) E has multiplicative (or semi-stable) reduction over Q if Ẽ
has a node.
(3) E has additive (or unstable) reduction over Q if Ẽ has a cusp.
In cases (2) and (3), E is naturally said to have bad reduction. If E
has multiplicative reduction, then the reduction is said to be split if
the tangent lines at the node are in the residue field and non-split if
they are not in the residue field.
The idea of Birch and Swinnerton Dyer was that the larger E(Q) is,
the larger the E(Fp )s should be on average as p varies. But how can
one measure the average size of the E(Fp )s?
2. The Conjecture of Birch and Swinnerton Dyer

The initial idea of Birch and Swinnerton Dyer is to look at partial
product of #E(Fp )/p’s and see how fast they are getting big.
The p-Defect. Define Np = #E(Fp ) =
1+{0 ≤ x, y ≤ p−1 : y 2 +a1 xy+a3 y = x3 +a2 x2 +a4 x+a6 mod p, ai ∈ Q}
The elliptic curve contains the additional point O which is not a solu-
tion to that congruence, so we expect the number of points in E(Fp ) to
be p + 1 + error term. The error term is fairly small in comparison to
p. Note that if E is singular, we do not count the one singular point
on cubic. This error term is called the p-Defect.
Definition 2.1 (p-Defect). For non-singular elliptic curves, we define
the p-defect as
ap = p + 1 − Np
For singular elliptic curves, the p-Defect is
ap = p − Np
The possible values for the p-Defect are bounded based upon p.
We observe that if E is singular, then E := y 2 = x3 + Ax2 . So our

analysis of value of A gives the following results by reducing E modulo
a prime p.
Value of A Reduction Type Isomorphism of Ens (Fp ) Np ap
0 Additive (Fp , +) p+1 1
2 ∗
B 6= 0 Split √(Fp , .) p 0
Non square Non-Split ({t ∈ Fp A : tt̄ = 1}, .) p+2 -1
Theorem 2.2 (Hasse, Weil). The p-defect ap satisfies the inequalities
√ √
−2 p ≤ ap ≤ 2 p
This theorem tells us that ap is relatively small compared to p.
Note: We observe that Hasses’ Theorem is non-trivial when the elliptic
curve has good reduction.
Define
Q Np
πE (x) := ∀x ∈ R
p≤x p
Birch and Swinnerton Dyer were led to compare the growth of πE (x) →
∞ with the growth of powers of the logarithm of x. In their computer
experiments, they graphed the function log πE (x) against log (log x),
and saw that in each case, the graph, although jagged, seemed to stay
near a line with a certain slope. And that slope was the rank (r) of
E as defined. Their jagged graphs led Birch and Swinnerton Dyer to
guess that if E is an elliptic curve over Q of rank r, then
πE (x) ∼ C(log x)r
for some non-zero, positive constant C depending only on E.
The function πE does not behave very nicely and therefore is difficult
to work with. Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer were then led to a modified
conjecture, using the L-function of E in place of πE .
Note: The rank we have been talking so far is the algebraic rank
and will be denoted by r.
Dirichlet Series and L-function of an Elliptic curve.

Definition 2.3 (Dirichlet Series). Let {an } be a sequence of numbers.
We define Dirichlet Series as:
∞
X
D(s, {an }) = an /ns
n=1
where s is a complex variable.

Sometimes, {an } is given by a function f(n).
The Dirichlet series of an elliptic curve arises from the p-Defects of a
fixed elliptic curve. The p-Defect (denoted by ap ) exists only when p
is a prime. We want to define the remaining an terms when n is not a
prime. We can create a relationship between the values of the a0n s to
the p-Defects as follows:
• for n=1, let a1 = 1,
• if p is prime, let ap be the p-Defect,
• if p is prime, k ≥ 2, and p is a good prime, let apk = apk−1 ap −
papk−2 , and
• if m and n are relatively prime, then set amn = am an
This gives us the Dirichlet series associated to the elliptic curve.
Definition 2.4 (Hasse-Weil L Function:). We define the Hasse-Weil

L-function of E, a function of a complex variable s by the Euler prod-
uct: Y Y
L(E, s) = (1 − ap p−s )−1 (1 − ap p−s + p1−2s )−1
p|∆ p6 |∆
3
converges for <(s) > .
2
The terms due to singularity for which p|∆ is known as the fudge
factor. We want to show that L(s, E) continues analytically to be
analytic function in the entire s-plane. This requires knowing:
(1) Every elliptic curve E is modular. (Wiles-1995, Taylor and
Wiles-1995 and Breuil et al.-2001)
(2) L-function of modular form has analytic continuation and a
functional equation. (Hecke)
A functional equation should relate the value of L(E, s) to the value of
the same function evaluated at some point other than s. For this we
define a new function Λ. We define
p
( C(E))s
Λ(E, s) = Γ(s)L(E, s)
(2π)s
where C(E) is the conductor of E.1 and Γ(s) is the Gamma function
which is analytic for all values except for s ∈ Z≤0 . So we have formed
a new function out of L(E, s) by multiplying with gamma function and
throwing in some other exponential factors.
Modular Forms.
Definition 2.5 (Modular Forms). Let T0 (C(E)) be a subgroup of SL(2, Z)
such that T0 (C(E)) =

a b
{ | a, b, c, d ∈ Z and ad − bc = 1, c ≡ 0 mod C(E)}
c d
Let H be the upper half-plane H = {z ∈ C, =(z) > 0} and let τ ∈ H
and q = e2πiτ . Then define the Modular form associated with the
Dirichlet series of an elliptic curve as follows
∞
X
fE (τ ) = an q n
n=1
Theorem 2.6 (Wiles). The holomorphic function fE (τ ) is a primitive

cusp form of weight 2 for T0 (C(E)).
The key corollary to this theorem is that
Corollary 2.7. The function Λ(E, s) can be analytically continued to
an entire function of s, and satisfies the functional equation:
Λ(E, s) = wE Λ(E, 2 − s)
where wE = 1 or −1.
1C(E) =
Q
pfp where fp = 1 if E has multiplicative reduction at p i.e. E has
p|∆
a node and fp = 2 + δp if E has additive reduction at p i.e. E has a cusp. Note
δp = 0 when p ≥ 5
This gives us the required functional equation. The root number wE

can be computed as a product of purely local factors. Now let us look
at the Taylor Series for Λ(E, s) at s = 1,
Λ(E, s) = c(s − 1)ρ + higher order terms
where c 6= 0. The other factors in Λ(E,p s) are conductor, exponents,
and Gamma function. At s =1, they are C(E)/2π and Γ(1) = 1. So,
the leading exponent ρ at s = 1 is same for Λ(E, s) and L(E, s). Thus
L(E, s) has analytic continuation on the whole s-plane. And ρ tells us
how fast L(E, s) → 0 as s → 1. We will soon see how this is thought
to be related to how fast πE (x) → ∞ as x → ∞. Since this last order
of growth is related to algebraic rank of E, the order of zero of L(E, s)
at s = is traditionally also called analytic rank of E (denoted by ρ).
Now again
Λ(E, 2 − s) = c((2 − s) − 1)ρ + higher order terms
⇒ Λ(E, 2 − s) = c(1 − s)ρ + higher order terms = wE c(s − 1)ρ + h.o.t.
where wE =1 if ρ is even and wE is −1 if ρ is odd.
L-Function and Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer Conjecture. [1]
Now we try to relate ρ to Np ’s for E. For s = 1, we have
Y Y
L(E, 1) = (1 − ap p−1 )−1 (1 − ap p−1 + p−1 )−1
p|∆ p6 |∆
We can guess to replace the right hand side with partial products, up
to p ≤ x for any real number x greater than the largest prime in S.
When we do, we get
(1 − ap p−1 )−1 (1 − ap p−1 + p−1 )−1
Q Q
RHS up to x =
p|∆,p≤x p6 |∆,p≤x
Taking reciprocals,
(1 − ap p−1 ) (1 − ap p−1 + p−1 )
Q Q
1/RHS up to x =
p|∆,p≤x p6 |∆,p≤x
Np p − ap
Now let us look at . For p |∆, this quotient is = 1 − ap p−1 .
p p
For p6 |∆, it is (p − ap + 1)/p = 1 − ap p−1 + p−1 . In every case, it is the
corresponding factor in the product we just wrote down. So we can
rewrite this product as
Q Np
1/RHS up to x =
p≤x p
We recognize the right hand side above as πE (x). Thus we get,
1
RHS up to x =
πE (x)
We now let x → ∞. From all this guess work, we get an idea

1
L(E, 1) = lim
x→∞ πE (x)
This equation says how fast L(E, s) tends to zero as s → 1 might be

related to how fast πE (x) tends to ∞ as x → ∞. A hunch based along
these lines led Birch and Swinnerton Dyer to equate the analytic rank
of E and the algebraic rank of E in their conjecture, the connecting
link between the growth of πE (x).
The Weak Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture. Let E be

an elliptic curve defined over Q. Then algebraic rank of E and analytic
Rank of E are equal.
r=ρ
This remarkable conjecture relates arithmetic properties of E to ana-
lytic properties of its L-function. One immediate consequence of the
two conjectures above is the strong parity conjecture.
The Strong Parity Conjecture. Let E be an elliptic curve defined

over Q. Then:
ρ ≡ r mod 2
We know that the parity of ρ is determined by the functional equation
Λ(E, s) = wE Λ(E, 2 − s)
where wE = (−1)ρ . Then by Birch-Swinnerton Dyer conjecture r = ρ.
Thus wE = (−1)r . To describe recent progress concerning the Parity
Conjecture, we need to introduce the Tate-Shafarevich group and the
Selmer group. For this we need some results from Galois cohomology.
Results from Galois Cohomology. [5]Let E(Q) and E 0 (Q) be two

isogenous elliptic curves defined over Q with a non-zero isogeny φ :
E → E 0 defined over Q and let G = GQ̄|Q . Define E[φ]=ker φ. There is
an exact sequence of G-modules and G-morphisms
φ
− E0 → 0
0 → E[φ] → E →
With Galois cohomology we get the long exact sequence
φ
− E 0 (Q)
0 → E(Q)[φ] → E(Q) →
→ H 1 (G, E[φ]) → H 1 (G, E) → H 1 (G, E 0 ) → ...
From this we obtain the fundamental short exact sequence
jφ
0 → E 0 (Q)/φ(E(Q)) → H 1 (G, E[φ]) −
→ H 1 (G, E)[φ] → 0
Let v run over places2 of field Q. Then Qv denotes completions of Q

and Gv denotes the decomposition3 group of G at v. Then we repeat
the above steps to obtain the exact sequence
jφ
0 → E 0 (Qv )/φ(E(Qv )) → H 1 (Gv , E[φ]) −
→ H 1 (Gv , E)[φ] → 0
Finally we obtain the following commutative diagram:
0 → E 0 (Q)/φ(E(Q)) → H 1 (G, E[φ]) → H 1 (G, E)[φ] → 0
Q 0 ↓ Q 1 ↓ Q 1 ↓
0 → E (Qv )/φ(E(Qv )) → H (Gv , E[φ]) → H (Gv , E)[φ] → 0
v v v
The group of all automorphisms of the algebraic closure of K that

fix K is the absolute Galois group GK . We define Weil-Châtelet group
directly from Galois cohomology as
H 1 (GK , A)
Tate-Shafarevich group. The Tate-Shafarevich group consists of el-

ements of the Weil-Châtelet group that become trivial in all comple-
tions of Q. In terms of Galois cohomology
Y
III(E | Q) := ker (H 1 (G, E) → H 1 (Gv , E))
v
The φ-torsion of the Tate-Shafarevich group is the subgroup of H 1 (G, E)[φ]

defined by
Y
III(E | Q)[φ] := ker (H 1 (G, E)[φ] → H 1 (Gv , E)[φ]).
v
φ-Selmer group. We define the φ-Selmer group by

Y
S φ (E | Q) := ker (H 1 (G, E[φ]) → H 1 (Gv , E)[φ]).
v
Note that S φ (E | Q) is actually equal to jφ−1 III(E | Q)[φ]. In ap-

plication, we take E = E 0 and φ is multiplication by m where m ≥ 2
(m = 2 for 2-descent and so on). So we have the following basic exact
sequence
0 → E(Q)/mE(Q) → S m (E | Q) → III(E | Q) → 0
Theorem 2.8. The Selmer group is finite for m > 1.
2Equivalence classes of valuation of Q.

3Decompostion group is the stabilizer of v under the action of G.
The existing methods for determining the rank r and basis points
of E(Q) all depend more or less on the Birch and Swinnerton Dyer
Conjecture and rely on the basic exact sequence above. Since, the
Selmer group can be computed depending on m,
r = rank(E(Q)/mE(Q))
is all a matter of computing the Tate-Shafarevich Group.
Let III(E | Q)div be the maximal divisible subgroup of III(E | Q).
Theorem 2.9 (Cassels-Tate). There is a canonical alternating bilinear
form on III(E | Q)/III(E | Q)div .
Corollary 2.10. The vector space (III(E | Q)/III(E | Q)div )[p] has
even Fp -dimension.
Corollary 2.11. If III(E | Q)div [p] = 0, then # III(E | Q)[p] is a
square.
3. Weak Parity Theorem of T. and V. Dokchitser
Classical Galois Cohomology shows that, for some integer tE,p ≥ 0,
we have:
Qp
III(E | Q)[p]=( )tE,p
L
(a finite group)
Zp
Qp
so that III(E | Q)div [p]=( )tE,p .
Zp
Conjecture: The group III(E | Q) is finite.
The answer to the above conjecture is undoubtedly one of the major
problems in Number Theory. However for elliptic curves with rank
greater than 1, it hasn’t been shown. If it happens to be true, than
tE,p = 0 for every p. So, the factor tE,p = 0 is also important to us and
the only main fact known regarding it was given by T. & V. Dokchitser.
Theorem 3.1 (T. & V. Dokchitser). Weak Parity Theorem. Let E(Q)
be any elliptic curve and p be a any prime. Then we have:
ρ ≡ tE,p + r mod 2.
So, if Tate-Shafarevich group was proven to be finite i.e. tE,p = 0,
then the weak parity theorem would imply the strong parity conjecture
ρ ≡ r mod 2. The main importance of the parity conjecture and
finiteness of the Tate Shafarevich group is that they can together imply
the Birch and Swinnerton Dyer conjecture. And we know finiteness of
Tate Shafarevich group alone with Weak Parity Theorem would imply
the Parity conjecture. Ultimately, all we care about is understanding
the mysterious Tate-Shafarevich Group.
Corollary 3.2. The parity of tE,p is independent of p.

For any prime p, we define:
Gp (E) = S p (E | Q)/Im(E(Q)tors )
Definition 3.3. Root Number. We define the root number as the prod-
uct of local root numbers.
Y
wE|Q = wE|R wE|Qp
p
Y
wE = −1. wE|Qp
p
To some extent, we have the following classification of wE|Qp :

• if E has good reduction at p (p | ∆E ) then wE|Qp = 1,
• if E has split multiplicative reduction at p (p | ∆E , Ẽ : y 2 =
x3 + nx, n ∈ F2p ), then wE|Qp = 1,
• if E has non-split multiplicative reduction at p (p | ∆E , Ẽ :
y 2 = x3 + nx, n does not belong in F2p ), then wE|Qp = 1,
• if E has additive reduction at p (p | ∆E , Ẽ : y 2 = x3 ) then
wE|Qp = 1 or −1 (it is possible to give a full classification, this
was done by Halberstadt and there are ≈ 50 cases).
Another way of stating the Weak parity theorem is
wE = (−1)r+tE,p
Corollary 3.4. Let p be a prime. Then Fp -dimension of Gp (E) is even
if and only if the root number wE of E is equal to 1.
Corollary 3.5. If wE = −1 and r = 0, then necessarily tE,p ≥ 1 for
all primes p.
4. The Exact Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Formula
The strong Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture is the weak Birch
and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture (r = ρ), together with an exact arith-
metic formula for the constant LE such that:
L(E, s) = LE (s − 1)ρ + higher order terms
We have r = ρ, III(E | Q) is finite and
LE #(III(E | Q))R∞ Q
= . cp (E).
c∞ (E) #(E(Q)tors )2 p|C(E)
We can see some new terms in the formula. There is a regulator term
R∞ that comes from the Neron-Tate height4.
4For p p
∈ Q such that gcd(p, q) = 1, height h( )=log(max(| m |, | n |)).
q q
Definition 4.1 (Neron-Tate Height). Let E(Q) be an elliptic curve

over Q and P ∈ Q, then the Neron-Tate height
h(mn P )
ĥ(P ) := lim
n→∞ m2n
with a fixed m ∈ N, m > 1.
That this limits exists can be easily shown and obviously it is unique.
So Neron and Tate proved that there is a unique real-valued function
ĥ on E(Q) such that for all P ∈ E(Q), we have
(1) ĥ(2P ) = 4ĥ(P ), and
(2) The difference ĥ(P ) − h(x(P )) is bounded.
Then ĥ is a quadratic form, that means ĥ is even and the pairing:
h , i: E(Q̄)x E(Q̄) → R
1
hP, Qi = (ĥ(P + Q) − ĥ(P ) − ĥ(Q)).
2
is symmetric and bilinear. This pairing is called Neron-Tate pairing.
This bilinear form is positive definite over E(Q)⊗R. Let P1 , P2 , ..., Pr
be any basis of E(Q) mod torsion, we can define the Regulator5 as
R∞ (E) = det(hPi , Pj i)1≤i,j≤r .
The next ingredient in the formula are the Tamagawa Numbers
cv (E) for v = ∞ and finite primes v dividing C(E). If prime p | C(E),
then we define
cp (E) = [E(Qp ) : E0 (Qp )],
where E0 (Qp ) = {P ∈ E(Qp ) : The reduction of P mod p is non
singular}. If E has good reduction, then E(Qp )/E0 (Qp ) is {O}. If
E has additive reduction, then E(Qp )/E0 (Qp ) has order ≤4 (cp (E)).
Then cp (E) = 1. If the reduction is multiplicative, then E(Qp )/E0 (Qp )
is cyclic. If E has split multiplicative reduction, then E(Qp )/E0 (Qp ) ∼
Z/mZ. Then cp (E) = φ(m). R
For v = ∞, define c∞ (E) = E(R) | ω | where ω is the differential
form associated with a global minimal model for E. It is unique upto
sign i.e. units in Z. The number c∞ is the number of components of
E(R) denoted by δE times the positive real period6 of ω denoted by
ΩE . Thus c∞ (E) = δE ΩE . The exact formula of Birch and Swinnerton
Dyer leads to another rationality question.
5Positive definiteness ⇒ R∞ (E) 6= 0.

6If E(C) ' C/L where L=ω1 Z + ω2 Z with ω1 , ω2 ∈ C. Then ω1 , ω2 are the
periods of elliptic curve E.
Conjecture: For all elliptic curves E(Q), we have

LE
∈ Q.
c∞ (E)R∞ (E)
5. Work of Kolyvagin and Gross Zagier

Define the modular curve X0 (C(E)) by
X0 (C(E)) = Γ0 (C(E))/(H ∪ P 1 (Q)),
where P 1 (Q) denotes the projective line over Q. Then X0 (C(E)) is the
set of complex points of a projective curve defined over Q, which we
also denote by X0 (C(E)). Let [∞] be the cusp at ∞ (i.e. corresponding
to ∞ ∈ P 1 (Q)).
Corollary 5.1. There is non constant rational map defined over Q:
ϕ : X0 (C(E)) → E
7
with ϕ([∞]) = O .
Theorem 5.2 (Kolyvagin and Gross Zagier). Assume ρ ≤ 1. Then
r = ρ and III(E | Q) is finite.
This is a very important result which shows that Birch and Swin-
nerton Dyer Conjecture holds when analytic rank ρ ≤ 1 (This was
extended to elliptic curves over any field by Zhang). But the same
has not been proven by assuming algebraic rank r ≤ 1. However if
we strengthen our hypothesis, by assuming r ≤ 1 and III(E | Q) is
finite, then we can get some results for weak form of Birch and Swinner-
ton Dyer Conjecture using Iwasawa Theory. However, nothing except
numerical evidence is known about ρ or r > 1. In practice the only
way to prove upper bounds for the rank of E has been to prove up-
per bounds for #S m (E | Q). Thus, the Kolyvagin and Gross Zagier
Theorem follows from
• ρ ≤ 1 ⇒ r ≥ ρ;
• ρ ≤ 1 ⇒ #S m (E | Q) ≤ Cmρ, with a constant C independent
of m.
The first assertion is trivial if ρ = 0 and was proved by Gross and
Zagier, when ρ = 1 by constructing a point of infinite order (a Heegner
point). In 1952, Heegner showed that one could sometimes hope to
construct rational points on E by taking certain canonical points in
X0 (C(E)) defined over number fields, taking their images on E, and
then taking a trace so that the resulting points are defined over Q.
7[∞] is the cusp at ∞.
The problem with this is that the trace might only give points of finite
order. In 1983, Gross and Zagier proved the following theorem.
Theorem 5.3 (Gross and Zagier). Assume that E is modular. If
L(E, 1) = 0 and L0 (E, 1) 6= 0, then Heegner’s construction gives a
point of infinite order on E over rationals.
Such points are called Heegner points. A Heegner point8 is a point on
a modular curve that is the image of a quadratic imaginary point of the
upper half-plane. This is a remarkable result. It means that one can
prove the existence of infinitely many rational solutions to an equation
by testing the vanishing of a certain analytic function. The GrossZagier
theorem (Gross & Zagier 1986) describes the height of Heegner points
in terms of a derivative of the L-function of the elliptic curve at the
point s = 1. In particular if the elliptic curve has (analytic-ρ) rank 1,
then the Heegner points can be used to construct a rational point on
the curve of infinite order (so the Mordell Weil group has rank (r) at
least 1). More generally, Gross, Kohnen & Zagier (1987) showed that
Heegner points could be used to construct rational points on the curve
for each positive integer n, and the heights of these points were the
coefficients of a modular form of weight 3/2.
The second assertion uses Kolyvagins method of Euler systems and
an infinite family of Heegner points. In 1988, Kolyvagin built on this
work of Gross and Zagier and gave the following theorem.
Theorem 5.4 (Kolyvagin). Assume E is modular. Then:
(1) If L(E, 1) 6= 0, then #E(Q) is finite.
(2) If L(E, 1) = 0 but L0 (E, 1) 6= 0, then E(Q) = Z ⊕ finite group.
Kolyvagin’s method involved introducing some new algebraic tech-
niques, in particular the notion of an Euler System. It also involved
some analytic results on the existence of twists of the L-functions of E
which have no zero or a zero to the first order.9 Let us start with finite
dimensional p-adic representation T of the Galois group of a number
field K. We then define an Euler system for T to be a collection of coho-
mology classes (which Kolyvagin calls derivative classes) cF ∈ H 1 (F, T )
for a family of abelian extensions F of K, with a relation between cF 0
and cF whenever F ⊂ F 0 . Kolyvagins machinery is designed to use
these derivative classes to provide an upper bound for the size of the
Selmer group associated to the Cartier dual10 T ∗ . One common feature
8They were defined by Bryan Birch and named after Kurt Heegner.
9See Quadratic Twists of Elliptic Curves.
10Given any finite flat commutative group scheme G over S, its Cartier dual is
the group of characters, defined as the functor that takes any S-scheme T to the
of all Euler systems is that they are closely related to special values
of L-functions. An important benefit of this connection is that the
bounds on Selmer groups that come out of Euler system machinery are
then linked to L-values (leading term of L-functions).
Combining these two statements with the basic exact sequence:
0 → E(Q)/mE(Q) → S m (E | Q) → III(E | Q) → 0
proves that if ρ ≤ 1, then r = ρ and #III(E| Q) ≤ C.
The theorem of Kolyvagin-Gross Zagier also answers the rationality
question for ρ ≤ 1.
LE
Theorem 5.5. If ρ ≤ 1, then ∈ Q.
c∞ (E)R∞ (E)
Case when ρ=0. From the work of Kolyvagin, we get both E(Q) and
III(E| Q) are finite. It follows that LE = L(E, 1) and R∞ =1. We thus,
define
L(E, 1)
Lalg (E, 1) =
c∞ (E)
which is a rational number. Due to limited knowledge of the exact
Birch and Swinnerton Dyer formula (even in above case), we break the
exact formula up into a p-part for all primes p. Iwasawa theory gives
considerable knowledge about this p-part.
Conjecture: Assuming ρ = 0, we have for all primes p,
ordp (Lalg (E, 1)) = ordp (Tam(E))−2ordp (#(E(Q)))+ordp (#(III(E | Q)))
Q
where Tam(E) = cq (E).
q|C(E)
Theorem 5.6 (Rubin). Assume that L(E, 1) 6= 0 and that E has com-
plex multiplication11.Then p-part of the Birch and Swinnerton Dyer
Conjecture holds for√all primes p 6= 2. (In addition, if E has complex
multiplication by Q −3, we must exclude p = 3 as well as p = 2).
When E does not have complex multiplication, we have the following
weaker theorem.
Theorem 5.7 (Kato, Skinner-Urban). Assume that L(E, 1) 6= 0. Then
the p-part of the Birch and Swinnerton Dyer holds for all good ordinary
primes p except those in some specified list, which certainly includes
p = 2.
abelian group of group scheme homomorphisms from the base change GT to Gm,T
and any map of S-schemes to the canonical map of character groups.
11If End(E) is strictly larger than Z, then we say E has complex multiplication.
Hence we conclude that the part 2 of the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer

Conjecture is largely unknown even though there is a lot of numerical
evidence in support of it.
Numerical Evidence for Birch and Swinnerton Dyer

Conjecture
[7] The really convincing evidence to support the conjecture of Birch
and Swinnerton Dyer comes from various partial results in the direction
of the conjecture. The first breakthrough being the theorem of Coates
and Wiles in 1977.
Theorem 5.8 (Coates-Wiles). Let elliptic curve E(Q) admit complex
multiplication. If E has infinitely many rational points, then L(E, 1) =
0.
In addition to these results, numerical evidence clearly supports the
Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture but there are some serious prob-
lems in verifying the conjecture for specific curves. We know that the
exact formula of Birch and Swinnerton Dyer involves the finiteness of
the Tate-Shafarevich group. We know that for analytic rank ρ ≤ 1,
Tate-Shafarevich group is finite (Kolyvagin-Gross-Zagier). For ρ ≥ 2,
nothing is known about the finiteness of Tate-Shafarevich group and
therefore we cannot provide numerical evidence for the strong form of
the conjecture. So we will give numerical evidence for the weak form of
the conjecture. We begin by asking ourselves some splitting questions.
We need to show ρ = r. We know it’s true for ρ ≤ 1 but how can we
determine ρ. We can start by finding out the root number wE . This
tells us about the parity of ρ. As a consequence of the modularity, it
L(E, 1)
follows that the ratio ∈ Q and can be exactly determined using
ΩE
modularity symbols. This gives us a discrete algorithm to determine
L(E, 1) = 0 or not and hence determine whether ρ = 0 or not. So
basically we are trying form following three cases:
• ρ = 0 or
• ρ = 1, 3, 5... (Odd)
• ρ = 2, 4, 6, ... (Even)
Now if our algorithm says ρ = 0, we stop. If it is not zero but odd,
then evaluate L0 (E, 1) and see if it is zero or not. If it is, then ρ = 1 if
it is. Similarly, if ρ is not zero but even, then evaluate L00 (E, 1) and see
if it is zero or not, if it is, then ρ = 2 if it is. If ρ is odd and L0 (E, 1)
is approximately zero. Then we can prove that it is exactly zero by
finding at least two independent points in E(Q), we can show r > 1,
and hence ρ > 1. Now computing L00 (E, 1) approximately will give us
ρ = 3 if it is. So if ρ < 1, then we can find the exact value of ρ by using
it’s root number for determining parity, modular forms to establish if
ρ = 0 , the theorem of Kolyvagin-Gross-Zagier to distinguish ρ = 1
from ρ = 3 and numerical evaluation of Lj (E, 1). If ρ > 3, there is no
way of determining ρ rigorously. For example if ρ = 4, we can guess
the parity and compute L00 (E, 1) approximately close to zero, but we
can’t show it is exactly zero. Similarly for ρ = 5, we can show it’s odd
and compute L000 (E, 1) approximately close to zero but there is no way
of showing that it is exactly zero. There are 614308 isogeny classes
of elliptic curves with conductor C(E)≤140000. All have ρ ≤3 and in
every case r = ρ.[7]
Range of C(E) # r=0 r=1 r=1 r= 3
0-9999 38042 16450 19622 1969 1
10000-19999 43175 17101 22576 3490 8
20000-29999 44141 17329 22601 4183 28
30000-39999 44324 16980 22789 4517 38
40000-49999 44519 16912 22826 4727 54
50000-59999 44301 16728 22400 5126 47
60000-69999 44361 16568 22558 5147 88
70000-79999 44449 16717 22247 5400 85
80000-89999 44861 17052 22341 5369 99
90000-99999 45053 16923 22749 5568 83
100000-109999 44274 16599 22165 5369 141
110000-119999 44071 16307 22173 5453 138
120000-129999 44655 16288 22621 5648 98
130000-139999 44082 16025 22201 5738 118
0-139999 614308 233979 311599 67704 1026
We will give some illuminating numerical examples in support of the
conjecture:[7]
• r=0:12 E: 11a1 has coefficients [0,-1,1,-10,-20] and conductor
L(E, 1) 1
11. The modular symbols give us = exactly. Thus,
Q Ω(E) 5
ρ = 0 and ρ = r. Moreover, cp = c11 = 5 and #E(Q)tors = 5.
p
Then strong form of Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture
predicts that:13:
12R = 1 when ρ=0
∞
13This
can be verified by careful application of known results: see R. L. Miller,
Proving the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture for specific elliptic curves of
analytic rank zero and one, arXiv:1010.2431v2 [math.NT]
L(E, 1)/Ω(E) 1/5

#III(E| Q)= Q 2
= =1
cp /#(E(Q)tors ) 5/52
p
• r=1:E: 12480b1 has coefficients [0,-1,0,-260,-1530] and conduc-
tor 12480=26 .3.5.13. The root number wE = −1 and so ρ is odd.
L0 (E, 1) = 4.258599... approximately so ρ=1. 2-Descent veri-
fies that r=1 and gives the generator (27,102) whose canonical
height is R∞ (E) = 3.5830.... It also shows that III(E| Q)[2] has
order 4. An AGM14(arithmetic-geometric mean) computation
shows that Ω(E) = 1.1885495..., now L0 (E, 1)/(Ω(E)R∞ (E)) =
1.0000000000.... The work of Gross and Q Zagier tells us that this
value should be exactly 1. We have cp = 1 and #E(Q)tors =
p
2. Then by strong form of Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjec-
ture predicts that:
L0 (E, 1)/R∞ (E)Ω(E) 1
#III(E| Q)= Q 2
= =4
cp /#(E(Q)tors ) 1/22
p
Kolyvagin’s work gives #III(E| Q) finite with no odd part.
Thus Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture holds.
• r=2: E: 389c1 with coefficients [0,1,-1,-2,0] and conductor 389.
Then the root number wE = +1 and so ρ is even. By us-
ing modular symbols we get ρ is not equal to zero. We com-
pute L00 (E, 1) = 1.51863300057685... approximately, so ρ=2.
2-Descent gives us r=2 and generators (0,-1) and (-1,1) with
R∞ (E) = 0.152460..., and also that III(E| Q)[2]=0. AGM com-
putation gives us Ω(E) = 4.980425.... Hence L00 (E, 1)/(2!Ω(E)R∞ (E)) =
1.0000000000.... This is just approximate
Q and the ratio is not
known to be rational. We have cp = 1 and #E(Q)tors = 1.
p
then Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture predicts that:
L00 (E, 1)/2R∞ (E)Ω(E)
#III(E| Q)= Q =1
cp /#(E(Q)tors )2
p
Thus, Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture holds if III(E|
Q)[p]=0 for every odd prime p and the above ratio is exactly 1.
• r=3: E: 234446d1 with coefficients [1,1,0,-696,6784] has con-
ductor 234446. The root number wE = −1, so ρ is odd. |
L0 (E, 1) |< 10−22 so we suspect ρ ≥3. By 2-Descent, r=3 and
14Let a,b ∈ C. Then AGM(a,b)= lim an = lim bn where an and bn are defined
n→∞ n→∞
an + bn √
as (a0 , b0 )=(a,b) and (an+1 , bn+1 )=( , an bn )
2
the generators are (15,-7),(16,-16) and (19,20) with R∞ (E) =

2.159011..., and also III(E| Q)[2]=0. The work of Kolyvagin
and Zagier tells us that ρ > 1. Now L000 (E, 1) = 59.09365958...
approximately. Thus ρ=3. AGM computation shows that Ω(E) =
2.2808923... and hence L000 (E,
Q 1)/(3!Ω(E)R∞ (E)) = 2.0000000000...
approximately. We have cp = 2.1 = 2 and #E(Q)tors = 1.
p
The Birch and Swinnerton Dyer conjecture predicts that:
L000 (E, 1)/6R∞ (E)Ω(E)
#III(E| Q)= Q =1
cp /#(E(Q)tors )2
p
Again Birch and Swinnerton Dyer conjecture holds when III(E|

Q)[p]=0 for all odd p, and the above ratio is exactly 2.
• r=4: E: 234446e1 with coefficients [1,-1,0,-79,289] has con-
ductor 234446. The root number wE = +1, so ρ is even.
| L00 (E, 1) |< 10−21 so we suspect ρ ≥4. By 2-Descent, r=4
and the generators are (-9,19),(-8,23),(-7,25) and (4,-7) with
R∞ (E) = 1.5043..., and also III(E| Q)[2]=0. Now L00 (E, 1) = 0
exactly and L4 (E, 1) = 214.6523375... approximately. Thus
ρ=4 but we can’t show ρ 6= 2!. AGM computation shows
that Ω(E) = 2.97267... and hence L4 (E, 1)/(4!Ω(E)R
Q ∞ (E)) =
2.0000000000... approximately. We have cp = 2.1 = 2 and
p
#E(Q)tors = 1. The Birch and Swinnerton Dyer conjecture
predicts that:
L4 (E, 1)/24R∞ (E)Ω(E)
#III(E| Q)= Q =1
cp /#(E(Q)tors )2
p
Again Birch and Swinnerton Dyer conjecture holds when III(E|

Q)[p]=0 for all odd p, and the above ratio is exactly 2.
6. An Interesting Example
Congruent Number Problem. [1] A concrete example of the num-
ber theoretic problem that can be solved if Birch and Swinnerton Dyer
Conjecture is proven to be true is the Congruent Number Problem.
This was shown by mathematician Jerrold Tunnell (1950-). Let n ∈ Z.
Then can we find a right triangle with sides a, b and c all rational
numbers with area n? In other words, we need to solve simultaneous
equations:
a2 + b 2 = c 2
ab
=n
2
for all rational numbers a, b, and c. If a solution exists, then n is called

a congruent number. It’s not too hard to see that n is a congruent
number if and only if the algebraic rank (r) of the elliptic curve defined
by the equation y 2 = x3 − n2 x is greater than zero, that is, if the curve
has infinitely many rational points on it. Each rational point leads to
a different solution (a, b, c).
Theorem 6.1. [1] Let n be a positive integer. There is a one to one
correspondence between the two sets:
ab
{(a, b, c)|a2 + b2 = c2 , = n, a, b, c > 0} ⇔ {(x, y)|y 2 =
2
x3 − n2 x, x, y > 0}
given by the mutual inverse functions
nb 2n2 x2 − n2 2nx x2 + y 2
(a, b, c) 7→ ( , ) and (x, y) 7→ ( , , ).
c−a c−a y y y
Theorem 6.2 (Tunnell). [1] Suppose n is a squarefree positive integer.
If n is odd, compute n1 and n2 , while n is even, compute n3 and n4 by
applying the following formulas:
n1 = #{(x, y, z)|n = x2 + 2y 2 + 8z 2 }
n2 = #{(x, y, z)|n = x2 + 2y 2 + 32z 2 }
n
n3 = #{(x, y, z)| = x2 + 4y 2 + 8z 2 }
2
n
n4 = #{(x, y, z)| = x2 + 4y 2 + 32z 2 }
2
where in all cases, the sums are over all integers x,y, and z. If n
is odd and a congruent number, then n1 = 2n2 . If n is even and a
congruent number, then n3 = 2n4 . Moreover, if the weak form of Birch
and Swinnerton Dyer conjecture is true, then the converse is also true.
If n is odd and n1 = 2n2 , then n is congruent, and if n is even and
n3 = 2n4 , then n is a congruent number.
Example 6.3. Assuming Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture, show
whether 1234567 is a congruent number? Assume n is odd and n =
x2 +2y 2 +8z 2 . Then x must be odd and hence x2 ≡ 1 mod 8. Also y is
either even or odd, and so 2y 2 is congruent to either 0 or 2 mod 8. It
follows that n is congruent to either 1 or 3 mod 8. The same reasoning
shows that if n is odd and n = x2 +2y 2 +32z 2 , then n is again congruent
to either 1 or 3 mod 8. Now, 1234567 = 127 × 9721, and both of those
are prime, so we know 123457 is square free. Moreover, 1234567 ≡ 7
mod 8, telling us that n1 = 0 and n2 = 0. Therefore, we know that
n1 = 2n2 . So, 1234567 is a congruent number. Note that if n is a
congruent number, there are infinitely many different right triangles
with rational sides whose area is n.
Example 6.4. Let n be a squarefree positive integer. Let E (N ) :

y 2 = x3 − N 2 x. Then a classical computation shows that wE N =+1
if N ≡ 1, 2, 3 mod 8, and wE N = −1 if N ≡ 5, 6, 7 mod 8. Now
when N ≡ 1, 2, 3 mod 8, then wE N = −1. We get Λ(E N , s) =
−Λ(E N , 2 − s). Substitute s = 1, we get Λ(E N , 1) = −Λ(E N , 1) which
N N N
gives
p Λ(E , 1) = 0. Now Λ(E , 1) differs from L(E , 1) by a factor
C(E)
. So L(E N , 1) = 0. Then by assuming the Birch and Swinner-
2π
ton Dyer Conjecture, we get E N has infinitely many rational points.
Thus, N is a congruent number.
Conjecture: If N is a square free positive integer such that N ≡ 5, 6, 7
mod 8, then N is a congruent number. (Thus 1234567 is a congruent
number)
Quadratic Twists of Elliptic Curves

Let C(K) be a smooth projective curve. Then we define
Isom(C):=The group of all isomorphisms defined from C to itself
over15 K̄.
IsomK (C):= The subgroup of Isom(C) consisting of isomorphisms
defined over K.
A twist of C(K) is a smooth curve C0 (K) which is isomorphic to C
over K̄.
Theorem 6.5. [5] Let C(K) be a smooth curve. For each twist C 0 (K)
of C(K), choose an isomorphism φ : C → C 0 and define a map ξ :
GK̄/K → Isom (C) ξσ = φσ φ−1 ∈ Isom(C). Then:
• ξ is a cocycle. (i.e. For all σ, τ ∈ GK̄/K , ξστ = (ξσ )τ ξτ ). We
denote the corresponding cohomology class in H 1 (GK̄/K , Isom(C))
by {ξ}.
• The cohomology class {ξ} is determined by the K-isomorphism
class of C 0 , independent of the choice of φ. We thus obtain a
natural map
Twist(C(K))→ H1 (GK̄/K , Isom(C)).
• The map above is a bijection. In other words, the twists of C(K)
(up to K-isomorphism) are in one to one correspondence with
the elements of the cohomology set H 1 (GK̄/K , Isom(C)).
15Usually
Isom(C)=Aut(C). But for elliptic curves, Aut(E) is defined as all
isomorphisms from E to E that take O to O. Thus for elliptic curves Aut(E)6=
Isom(E)
Let E(K) be an elliptic curve and let us ignore the base point O,
then the twists of E(K) correspond to the set H 1 (GK̄/K ,Isom(E)).
Now Isom(E) has two obvious subgroups namely Aut(E) and E (E is
identified as the set of translations {τp } in Isom(E)). Generally the
twist of E corresponds to the set H 1 (GK̄/K , Aut(E)). But such a twist
should be called a twist of a pair (E, O).
Theorem 6.6. [5] Let E(K) be an elliptic curve.
• The natural inclusion Aut(E)⊂Isom(E) induces an inclusion:
H 1 (GK̄/K , Aut(E)) ⊂ H 1 (GK̄/K , Isom(E))
We identify the latter set by Twist(E(K)) and the former by
Twist((E,O)(K)).
• Let C(K) ∈ Twist((E,O)(K)). Then C(K)6= φ, and so C(K)
can be given the structure of an elliptic curve over K. (C is not
generally K-isomorphic to E).
• Conversely, if E0 (K) is an elliptic curve which is isomorphic to
E over K̄, then E0 (K) represents an element of Twist((E,O)(K)).
If the characteristic of K is not 2 or 3, then the elements of Twist((E,O)(K))
can be described explicitly by the following theorem.
Theorem 6.7. [5] Assume that char(K) 6= 2, 3, and let

2 if jE 6= 0, 1728

n = 4 if jE = 1728

6 if j = 0
E
Then Twist((E, O)(K)) is canonically isomorphic to K ∗ /K ∗n .

More precisely, choose a Weierstrass equation:
E: y 2 = x3 + Ax + B
for E(K) and let d ∈ K ∗ , then the elliptic curve Ed ∈ Twist((E, O)(K))
corresponding
 to d mod K ∗n has the Weierstrass equation:
2 3 2 3
Ed : y = x + dAx + d B if jE 6= 0, 1728;

Ed : y 2 = x3 + dAx2 if jE = 1728;
E : y 2 = x 3 + d 3 B

if jE = 0
d
We have been considering ranks of arbitrary elliptic curves over Q
till now. To understand ranks, it is useful to consider special families
of elliptic curves. Quadratic twists give perhaps the simplest such
families, since even though their complex analysis is constant (i.e., they
are isomorphic over C), their arithmetic varies.
If E is given by y 2 = x3 + ax + b with a, b∈ Q, then the qua-
dratic twist of E by a nonzero rational number d is the elliptic curve
y 2 = x3 + ad2 x + bd3 . It will be convenient to make the change of

variables (x, y) → (dx, d2 y), so that we can rewrite this curve in the
equivalent (isomorphic) form E (d) : dy 2 = x3 + ax + b. We are par-
ticularly interested in the behavior of rank(E (d) ) as d varies. Clearly
2
E (dt ) is isomorphic to E (d) for every t ∈ Q∗ , so we need only consider
squarefree integers d. So d is a non-zero square free integer such that
d 6=1. Further E (d) is the unique elliptic curve defined over Q which √ is
not isomorphic to E over Q but becomes isomorphic to E over Q√ d.
Q d
Then E (d) is said to be the twist of E by a quadratic extension .
Q
Then we have
∼ √
→ E(Q d)−1
E (d) (Q) −
√ √
where E(Q d)−1 is the subgroup of points √ in E(Q d) on which non-
Q d
trivial elements of the Galois group of acts like -1. As d varies
Q
E(d) gives the simplest infinite family of elliptic curves. Let L(E, s)
and L(E (d) , s) be the complex L-series of E and E (d) respectively with
root numbers wE and wE (d) . Roughly the root number has fifty percent
probability for +1 and rest fifty percent for -1 (Root Number Equidis-
tribution Conjecture). Let√χd be the quadratic Dirichlet character at-
Q d
tached to the extension . Let C(Ed ) be relatively prime to C(E).
Q
Concretely, χd is the unique Dirichlet character modulo d (if d ≡ 1
mod 4) or 4d (if d ≡ 2, 3 mod 4)) with the property
wE (d) = χd (−C(E))wE
This tells us how the sign in the functional equation of the L-function
changes under quadratic twist. Consider those d for which L(E (d) ,s)
has a zero at s = 1 of order at most 1. It’s particularly interesting be-
cause in this case, we know from the work of Kolyvagin-Gross-Zagier
that the rank of E (d) is equal to the order of this zero at s = 1 (r = ρ)
and the Tate-Shafarevich of E (d) is finite.
Conjecture: (Goldfeld) If wE (d) = +1, then L(E (d) , 1) 6= 0 out-

side a set of zero density and if wE (d) = −1, then L(E (d) ,s) has a simple
zero16 at s = 1 outside a set of zero density.
16A
complex number a is a simple zero of f , or a zero of multiplicity 1 of f , if
f can be written as f (z) = (z − a)g(z), where g is a holomorphic function g such
that g(a) is not zero.
Let C(E) be the conductor of E. Γ0 (C(E)) denotes the congruence

subgroup of SL2 (Z) defined as Γ0 (C(E)) :=:
a b
{( ) ∈ SL2 (Z) : a, b ≡ +1 or −1 mod C(E) &
c d
c, d ≡ 0 mod C(E))}
Let X0 (C(E)) be the corresponding compactified17 modular curve. By
Wiles theorem, we know that there exists a non-constant rational map
say f : X0 (C(E)) → E that maps [∞]18 to the point O.
Theorem 6.8 (Manin-Drinfeld ). Let x, y be cusps. If Γ is the con-
gruence subgroup then:
{x, y}Γ ∈ H1 (XΓ , Q)

is in the homology with rational coefficients.
Corollary 6.9. Every divisor of degree zero on XΓ whose components
are cusps is of finite order in the group of divisor classes.
Thus, for a cusp at point zero on the complex plane [0], by the
theorem of Manin-Derinfeld, we get that f ([0]) is a torsion point in
E(Q).
Let K be a field with algebraic closure K and characteristic p >0.
Let E an elliptic curve over K. Then
(
0 or
E(K)[pr ] ∼
= r
Z/p Z
for r = 1, 2, 3, . . .
In the first case, E is called supersingular. Otherwise it is called
ordinary. In other words, an elliptic curve is supersingular if and only
if the group of geometric points of order p is trivial.
Theorem 6.10. [3] Let E(Q) be an elliptic curve with conductor C(E)
and let f:X0 (C(E)) → E be a modular parametrization as defined above.
Assume that
(1) f([0]) ∈ 2 E(Q);
(2) there is a good supersingular19 prime q1 for E, with q1 ≡ 1
mod 4, and C(E) a square modulo q1 .
17Obtained by adding finitely many points called the cusps of Γ
18We will always assume the cusps at [∞]
19If the curve E defined over the rational numbers, then a prime p is supersingular
for E if the reduction of E modulo p is a supersingular elliptic curve over the residue
field Fp
Then, if k is any integer ≥1, there are infinitely many square integers
M, having exactly k prime factors, such that L(E (M ) , s) has a zero at
s=1 of order 1. Similarly, if k is any integer ≥2, there are infinitely
many square-free integers M, having exactly k prime factors such that
L(E (M ) , s) does not vanish at s=1.
We prove this theorem in the next section.
7. Generalisation of Birch’s Lemma

√
An imaginary quadratic field is defined as a field K = Q d with
d < 0 such that [K : Q] = 2. Let K be an imaginary quadratic √
field , which for simplicity, we assume is√ not equal to Q(i), Q −3.
A ring of integers of a quadratic field Q d contains elements of the
form
( √ a + ωb where a and b are integers and ω is defined as: ω =
d√ if d ≡ 2, 3 (mod 4)
1+ d
. Let O be the ring of integers of K. A Z
2
if d ≡ 1 (mod 4)
basis of O is {1, ω}. For a nonzero √ square free integer d, the discrimi-
nant of the quadratic field K = Q d is d if d is congruent to 1 modulo
4, and otherwise 4d. A quadratic order o in a quadratic field is a free
Z-module of rank 2, with integral elements. Let the discriminant of
an order o be denoted by do . The ring O has a unique maximal order
in K. The fundamental discriminant dK of the field K is√the discrim-
inant of maximal order, that is, dK = dO . Thus K = Q dK and d is
congruent to 0,1 modulo 4. Any order o is contained in the maximal
order and the conductor of o is the index [O : o] as Z modules, In fact,
for every m∈ N, the quadratic order o(d, m) := Z[1, mω] is the unique
order of conductor m in the quadratic field K and it’s discriminant is
do(d,m) = m2 dK . Thus the conductor determines the order. Let χ be
the abelian character of K. ∞
an q n
P
Let E be an elliptic curve over Q of conductor C, and let φ=
n=1
be the fourier expansion corresponding primitive cusp form of weight 2
of Γ(C(E)) normalised such that a1 = 1 (Wiles). Let (φ, φ)Γ0 (C) denote
the Petersson norm of φ:
RR
(φ, φ)Γ0 (C)/H = Γ0 (C)
(| φ(z) |)2 dxdy, z = x + iy.
For each positive integer M with (M, C) = 1, let OM = Z + M O be
the order of K of conductor M . We further assume that K satisfies the
Heegner hypothesis for E (first introduced by Birch in a special case):
(1) (M, C) = 1 and no prime divisor p of C is inert20 in K, and

also p must split21 in K if p2 | C.
(2) χ([p]) 6= ap for any prime p | (C, D) where p is the unique prime
ideal O above p and [p] is it’s class in Pic(OM )22.
Thus there exists C ⊂ O such that O/C ∼ = Z/CZ. Further let CM =
C ∩ OM . The point
PM = (C/OM → C/C−1 M)
on X0 (C) is defined over the ring class field HM of K, and is called the
Heegner point of conductor M . Heegner points are constructed using
complex multiplication and a fixed choice of modular parametrization
φE : X0 (C) → E of minimal degree. We recall that HM is the abelian
extension over K characterised by the property that the Artin map23
induces an isomorphism,
K̂ ∗ /K ∗ ÔM
∗
→ Gal(HM /K)
where K̂ ∗ denotes the idele group of K, and ÔM
∗
denotes the tensor
∗ ∗
product over Z of OM denotes the tensor product over Z of OM with
Q
Ẑ = Zp . The Heegner points PM are related to the value at s = 1 of
p
the derivative of the L-function by the generalised Gross-Zagier formula
by Yuan-Zhang-Zhang but when it comes to the actual applications of
the arithmetic of elliptic curves, one requires the explicit Gross and
Zagier formula. We only require a special case of this formula and we
state that case in it’s explicit formula without proof.
7.1. Special Case of Explicit Gross Zagier Formula. Let E be

an elliptic curve over Q with conductor C. Let f : X0 (C) → E be a
modular parametrization as defined before mapping the cusp ∞ to the
identity in the elliptic curve and φ be the primitive eigenform of weight
20p is inert means (p) is a prime ideal and the quotient ring is the finite field
with p2 elements: O/pO = Fp2
21p splits means (p) is a product of two distinct prime ideals of O and the quotient
ring is the product O/pO = Fp × Fp
22Pic(X) is the Picard group defined as the sheaf cohomology
∗
group:=H 1 (X, OX ). It is the group of isomorphism classes of invertible
sheaves (or line bundles) on X, with the group operation being tensor product.
23Take K a number field and L an Abelian extension, then form a prime divisor
m that is divided by all ramified primes of the extension L/K. Now define a map
φ( L/K) from the fractional ideals relatively prime to m to the Galois group of
L/K that sends an ideal a to ((L/K), a). This map is called the Artin map. Its
importance lies in the kernel, which Artin’s reciprocity theorem states contains
all fractional ideals that are only composed of primes that split completely in the
extension L/K.
√
2 attached to E. Let 24K6= Q(i), Q( −3) be an imaginary quadratic
field of discriminant dK and assume Heegner hypothesis holds. Let χ
be the ring class character of K with conductor M , where M ≥ 1 is
such that (M, CdK )=1. Let PM denote the Heegner point of X0 (C) of
conductor M defined as above, and put:
f (PM )σ χσ ,
P
Pχ (f ) :=
σ∈Gal(HM /K)
which lies in the tensor product of E(HM ) with C. Let L(E/K, χ, s)
be the complex L-series of E/K twisted by χ. Then
8π 2 (φ, φ)Γ0 (C) ĥK (Pχ (f ))
L0 (E/K, χ, 1) = p .
| dk M 2 | deg(f )
where ĥK is the Neron-Tate height on E over K and (φ, φ)Γ0 (C) is the
Petersson norm as defined before.
0 −1
Let αC = ( ). Then the Fricke involution wC on the space
C 0
weight 2 cusp forms S2 (Γ0 (C)) is defined in the following way:
wC : S2 (Γ0 (C)) → S2 (Γ0 (C)) such that f 7→ f ◦ [αC ]
1 −1
explicitly wC f (τ ) = f ◦ [αC ](τ ) = 2
f( ). Note that wC is an
(Cτ ) Cτ
involution on the space of weight two cusp forms, i.e. wC2 =id. Let PM
be the set of all conjugates of PM under the action of the Galois group
of HM over K. Let τ represent complex conjugation and wc represent
Fricke involution, we have the equality of sets
w c PM = τ P M
Let E be an elliptic curve over Q of conductor C. Fix a modular
parametrisation f : X0 (C) → E. By means of this parametrisation, we
can transfer the Heegner point construction from the modular curve to
the elliptic curve, so that we can obtain certain points on E defined
over ring class fields. Define
yM := f (PM ) ∈ E(HM )
where HM is the ring class field of K of conductor M . Furthermore if
we let P = PM := (C/O, C−1 /O) ∈ E(H), where H is the Hilbert class
field of K, then define
y1 = f (P ) ∈ E(H) and yK = T rH/K (f (P )) ∈ E(K)
where the trace is taken by summing the conjugates
√ of y1 using the
group law on E. Let us consider K = Q −l0 from now onwards,
where l0 is a prime such that l0 > 3 and l0 ≡ 3 mod 4. Then by
classical genus theory, K has odd class number.
24Let ∗
√
u=[OM : Z∗ ]. Then u = 1 unless K 6= Q(i), Q( −3)
Theorem 7.1 (Birch). [3] Let E be an elliptic curve defined over Q

with conductor C. Let f : X0 (C) → E be a fixed √
modular parametrisa-
tion and assume that f ([0]) ∈
/ 2E(Q). Let K = Q −l0 as defined above
and let the Heegner hypothesis hold. Let C be an ideal in O such that
O/C ∼ = Z/CZ and let P = P1 as defined above be the corresponding
Heegner Point of conductor 1. Then yK = T rH/K (f (P )) is of infinite
order in E(K).
Proof. Let = ±1 be the eigen value of the Fricke involution wC on
the eigen form f associated to the modular curve E:
f |wC = .f
We first note that f ◦ wc − f is a constant morphism where = ±1 is
negative of the sign in the functional equation of the complex L-series
L(E, s), i.e. Λ(E, s) = −Λ(E, 2 − s) (Hecke). Thus, for all points
P ∈ X0 (C), we have:
f (P wc ) − f (P ) = f ([∞]wc ) − f ([∞]) = f ([0])
If = 1, then we can take P to be the fixed point of the Fricke in-
volution (f (P wc ) = f (P )). It them follows that f ([0]) is the iden-
tity of the Elliptic Curve (O). But the identity belongs to 2E(Q). So
f ([0]) ∈ 2E(Q). This is a contradiction to our hypothesis which says
that f ([0]) ∈
/ 2E(Q). Thus = −1. Now since we have the equality of
sets wc PM = τ PM , it follows
yK + yK = hf ([0]),
√
where h denotes the class number of K. But since K = Q −l0 and has
odd class number, it follows that h is odd. Thus, T = hf ([0]) ∈
/ 2E(Q).
Let a denote the integer that annhilates all elements of odd finite order
in E(K). Now if y K is of finite order, then
t = ayK ∈ E(K)[2∞ ].
Now we observe that K/Q is totally ramified at the prime l0 whereas
only primes dividing 2C are ramified in the field Q(E[2∞ ]). Thus we
get
E(K)[2∞ ] = E(Q)[2∞ ].
So, t = ayK ∈ E(Q)[2∞ ]. Also, then yK is also of odd finite order.
Thus,
a(yK + yK ) = 2t ∈ 2E(Q)
which implies that T ∈ 2E(Q) which is a contracdiction. Thus, yK is of
infinite order and does not belong to the torsion subgroup of E(K).
By applying the theorem of Gross and Zagier to the point yK and from
the properties of canonical height, we get yK has infinite order if and
only if L0 (E/K, 1) 6= 1. Further we note the following proposition:
Let K be a quadratic number field with discriminant d, (here −l0 ),
and E be an elliptic curve over Q. Then:
(1) rank E(K)= rank E(Q)+ rank E (d) (Q) and
(2) L(E/K) = L(E | Q, s)L(E (d) | Q)
The following corollary[3] immediately follows which implies the asser-
tion of Theorem we want to prove when k = 1.
Corollary 7.2. [3] Let E be an elliptic curve defined over Q with con-
ductor C. Let f : X0 (C) → E be a fixed modular √ parametrisation
and assume that f ([0]) ∈ / 2E(Q). Let K = Q −l0 as defined above
and let the Heegner hypothesis hold. Let C be an ideal in O such that
O/C ∼= Z/CZ and let P = P1 as defined above be the corresponding
Heegner Point of conductor 1. Then the complex L-function L(E/K, s)
of E over K has a simple zero at s = 1, L(E, s) does not vanish at
s = 1 and L(E (−l0 ) ,s) has a simple zero at s = 1.
Proof. From previous theorem, we get that yK is of infinite order. So,
we have constructed a point of infinite order and so by the theorem of
Gross and Zagier, we get that the complex-L series of E over K has a
simple zero at s = 1. Then, as L(E/K, s) = L(E, s)L(E −l0 , s). Also
(7.1) wE wE (−l0 ) = (wE )2 χ−l0 (−C)

(7.2) = χ−l0 (−C)
(7.3) = χ−l0 (−1)χ−l0 (C)
(7.4) = (−1/l0 )(C/l0 ) (Legendre Symbol)
l0 − 1
(7.5) = (−1) 2 (C/l0 )
4n + 3 − 1
(7.6) = (−1) 2 .1
(7.7) = −1
Thus, we get the root number of L(E/K, s) is -1. We have L(E, s) has
root number +1 (as = −1). So root number for L(E (−l0 ) , s) is also
-1. Thus by the theorem of Gross and Zagier, we see that L(E, s) does
not vanish at s = 1 while L(E(−l0 ) , s) has a simple zero at s = 1.
We now try to generalise Birch’s result for quadratic twists.
Sensitive Supersingular Prime. We define q1 to be a sensitive su-

persingular prime for the elliptic curve E if:
• q1 is a prime for good supersingular reduction for E,
• q1 ≡ 1 mod 4, and
• C = C(E) is a square modulo q1 .
Frobenius Endomorphism. Let E | Fq be an elliptic curve over the
finite field Fq . Then the q-Frobenius endomorphism φq : E → E is
given by
φq (x, y) = (xq , y q ), φq (O) = O
We will need some results about density of primes before we state the
next theorem.
We begin by looking at the Frobenius element. In the case of an
abelian extension L ⊃ K, we have an Artin symbol A(p)(α) ∈ Gal(L/K)
for primes p 6 |∆L/K , with the unique property that for all α ∈ OL ,
A(p)(α) ≡ α#OK /p mod pOL
This element A(p) is often called the frobenius at p. If we drop the
condition that L/K is ablian and insist only that it be a Galois exten-
sion (Here restriction of G =Gal(JK/Q) to J), then by definition of
the artin map depends on a choice of prime q (of J) lying over p (here
q1 ). Upon this choice when p 6 |∆L/K , there is a unique F robq ∈ G such
tha for all α ∈ OL ,
Frobq (α) ≡ α#OK /p mod q.
25
Note that the frobenius element restricts well to subfields.
Chebotarev Density Theorem. Let L ⊃ K be Galois, and let C ⊂
G = Gal(L/K) be a conjugacy class. Then
{p : P is a prime of K, p 6 |∆L/K , F robp = σp ∈ C}
#C
has density . In particular, this ratio is always> 0.
#G
Natural Density & Analytic Density. If s is a set of primes of K,
then we define the natural density of S to be
#{p : (#OK /p) ≤ x, p ∈ S}
d(S) = lim
x→∞ #{p : (#OK /p) ≤ x, p prime}
if this limit exists. If the natural density exits, then it is actually equal
to the analytic density
25This really depends on the choice of q. We define frobenius symbol of p in
L/K to be the conjugacy class {F robq : q | p}. Note that in the case of an abelian
group, this set contains only a single element- though formally the element and the
set containing this element are two different objects.
P 1
s
p∈S #(OK /p)
dan (S) = lim+1 P
s→1 1
s
p prime #(OK /p)
The converse is however not true, however, there are cases where the
analytic density exists but the natural does not. However, the Cheb-
otarev Density theorem is valid with either notion of density.
Tate Module. Given an abelian group A and a prime number p, the
p-adic Tate module of A is
Tp (A) = lim A[pn ]
←
n n
where A[p ] is the p torsion of A (i.e. the kernel of the multiplica-
tion by pn map and the inverse limit is over positive integers n with
transition morphism given by the multiplication by p map
A[pn+1 ] → A[pn ]
Thus, the Tate module encodes all the p-power torsion of A. It is
equipped with the structure of Zp -module via z(an )n = ((z mod pn )an )n .
Lemma 7.3. P [3]n Let E be an elliptic curve over Q with a primitive
cusp φ = an q . Assume that E possesses a sensitive supersingular
n P
prime q1 , which is inert in K. For each integer r≥ 2, define r to be
the set of all primes q 6= q1 such that:
• q ≡ 1 mod 4,
• aq ≡ 0 mod 2r ,
• (q, C) = 1 and C is a square modulo q, and
• q is inert in K.
P
Then r is infinite of positive density in the set of primes.
√
Proof. Let J=Q( C, E[2r ]), and note √ that K ∩ J = Q. This is because
l0 is totally ramified in K/Q as K=Q −l0 and only those primes di-
viding 2C can ramify in J. As we know l0 ≡ 3 mod 4. So (l0 ,2C)=1.
This means that the prime l0 is not ramified in J.
Now since C is a square modulo q1 , we get (q1 , C) = 1 and since q1 ≡ 1
mod 4, we get that q1 is odd. So (q1 ,2C)=1 (By definition of Sensitive
Supersingular prime). This means that even q1 is not ramified in J.
Consider JK. Then any prime dividing 2l0 q1 C is ramified in JK.
Let ∆ = Gal(JK/Q). Since J and K are both extensions of Q and

J ∩ K = Q, we get
Gal(JK/Q)∼
= Gal(K/Q)⊕Gal(J/Q)
Then (by the theory of Frobenius elements discussed above), there

exists a unique element σ ∈ ∆, whose restriction to K is complex con-
jugation and whose restriction to J is the Frobenius automorphism of
some prime of J above q1 .
For r≥2, we define:

P
r := The set S of all primes not dividing 2l0 q1 C.
whose Frobenius automorphisms in ∆ lie in the conjugacy class of σ.

Now since all the
Pconditions for the Chebotarev’s Theorem match for
any prime q Pof r , and so we apply this to the conjugacy class of σ,
we get that r is infinite of positive density in the set of all prime
numbers. P
We now verify that r satisfies all the desired properties.
• Since q1 is a prime and q1 ≡ 1 mod 4. So we get q1 ≥ 5. Also,
q1 is supersingular. This means that E[q1r ]∼ = 0 ∀r ≥ 1. So
aq1 = 0. Then the characteristic polynomial of the Frobenius
automorphism of q1 acting on the p-adic Tate module is given
by
T 2 + aT + q1 with p|a.
=T 2 + q1 as a = aq1 = 0
In particular for a 2-adic Tate module T2 (E), the characteric-
tic polynomial of q1 remains same. Similarly the characteristic
polynomial of the Frobenius automorphism of prime q not div-
ing 2C and acting on T2 (E) is
X2 + aq X + q with 2 | aq
Since E[2 ]=T Since E[2r ] = T2 (E)/2r T2 (E), we conclude that
r
for q in set S, we have aq ≡ 0 mod 2r and q ≡ q1 mod 2r .

• q1 inert in K ⇒ q inert
√ in K.
• Finally, q splits in Q C because q1 splits in this field.

Theorem 7.4. [3] Assume that
• f [0] ∈
/ 2E(Q), and
• there exists a sensitive supersingular prime q1 for E.
√
Let K be given as above by Q −l0 such that every prime dividing C
splits in K and let q1 be inert in K. For each integer r ≥ 1, let
R = q1 q2 q3 ...qr
P
where for r ≥ 2 , q2 , q3 , ..., qr are any distinct
√ primes in the set r
as defined in the previous lemma. Then K R is a subfield of the ring
class field HR . Writing χR for the character of K attached to this

quadratic extension, define the Heegner point yR by
χR (σ)f (PR )σ
P
yR =
σ∈Gal(HR /K)
√
Then,√for each integer r ≥ 1, we√have yR ∈ 2r−1 E(Q(√ −l0 R))− +
E(Q( −l0 R))tor but yR ∈ / 2r E(Q( −l0 R))− + E(Q( −l0 R))tor . In
particular, yR is of infinite order.
We will require three preliminary lemmas for the proof of this The-
√ √
orem. Define HR =K( q1 , ..., qr ).
Lemma 7.5. [3] The field HR is a subfield of HR over HR is odd.
Moreover, E(HR )[2∞ ]=E(Q)[2].
Proof. Let q denote any of the primes q1 , q2 , ..., qr and let h denote the
class number of K. Since q is inert in K, then clearly the ring class
field Hq of conductor q has degree (q + 1)h. Now q ≡ 1 mod 4. Then
q is of the form 4n + 1 for some integer n. Then (q + 1) = 2(2n + 1).
Also h is odd. Then ord2 (q + 1)h = ord2 2(2n + 1)h = 1. Hence, factor
2 is contributed from a unique quadratic field which is an extension of
√
K. This extension must be equal to K. Now K( q) is a quadratic
√
extension of K with discriminant q as q ≡ 1 mod 4. Then K( q) is
unramified outside q. Thus, this is the quadratic extension contained
in Hq as it’s quadratic extension must be unramified outside q and this
√
is a unique extension. Now since [K( q) : K] = 2. Then by tower
theorem,
√ (q + 1)h
[Hq : K( q)]= = (2n + 1)h
2
which is clearly odd. Let this q = q1 (By rearranging q). Then we
√
now take Hq2 ring class field over K( q1 ) of conductor q2 . Then Hq2
has degree (q2 + 1)(q1 + 1)h over K which is equal to (q2 + 1)(2n +
√
1)h over K( q). Now repeating the above procedure for q2 , we get
ord2 (q2 + 1)(2n + 1)h = 1. Thus, Hq2 contains a unique quadratic ex-
√
tension of K( q1 ) which is unramified outside q2 . And is thus equal to
√ √
K( q1 , q2 ). This means that Hq2 contains two quadratic extensions
√ √
of K (namely K( q1 ) and K( q2 )). And by tower theorem:
√ √ (q2 + 1)(q1 + 1)h
[Hq2 : K( q1 , q2 )]=
22
which is odd as before.
Continuing this procedure, we get HR to be the composition of the
following all such maps Hq for the primes q dividing R. Thus, by
induction on r, we get, that Hqr contains a unique quadratic extension
√ √ √
of K( q1 , q2 , ..., qr−1 ) which does not ramify outside qr . Thus HR
contains a unique extension of K of degree 2r over K which is explicitly
given by HR . And then
(qr + 1)(qr−1 + 1)...(q1 + 1)h
[HR :HR ]=
2r
which is odd as qi ≡ 1 mod 4 for i = 1, .., r. Now we prove the second
assertion. Now by construction of quadratic extensions above, we note
that at least one of the primes l0 , q1 , q2 , ..., qr must ramify in every
subfield of HR that is strictly larger than Q. And also only primes
diving 2C may ramify in Q(E[2∞ ]). Thus,
E(HR )[2∞ ] = E(Q)[2∞ ]
Since E has a sensitive supersingular prime q1 , then necessarily E(Q)[2∞ ]
has at most order 2, because reduction moduli the sensitive supersin-
gular prime is injective on E(Q)[2∞ ] and there are q1 + 1 points with
coordinates in Fq1 on the reduced curve. Thus only one 21 divides
q1 + 1. Thus we get
E(Q)[2∞ ]=E(Q)[2].

Lemma 7.6. [3] Let P(HR ) be the set of conjugates of the point PR
under the action of the Galois group HR over HR . Then we have the
equality of sets:
wC P(HR ) = τ P(HR )
where τ denotes complex conjugation and wC denotes Fricke involution.
Proof. Let K be the number field as defined before and consider the
ring class field extension HR /K of conductor R. Then Gal(HR /K)'
Cl(OR ) where Cl(OR ) is the ideal class group. Then it acts on PR as
follows:
C.PR = (PR )σC ∀C ∈ Cl(OR ),
where σC denotes the image of C in Gal(HR /K) under the Artin map.
We know that the set of conjugates of Heegner points PR uder the
action of Galois group of HR /K is given by
{(PR )σ ∈ E(C) | σ ∈ Gal(HR /K)}.
Let τ represent complex conjugation. We know wC(PR ) = (PR )σC . But
√
for each prime q dividing R, we restrict the Artin symbol σC to Q( q)
√ √
(Since [Q( q) : Q] = 2, Gal(Q( q)/Q) ' {±1}) is the Artin symbol
√
of CZ=NK/Q (C) for this extension and this symbol fixes q because
C is square modulo q. That is, C is a quadratic residue modulo q

which implies that |C| is also square modulo q. Thus σC = 1. For
each positive √
divisor D of R, let χD be the character attached to the
extension
√ K( D)/K, and define the imprimitive Heegner point zD in
E(K( D)) by
χD (σ)f (PR )σ
P
zD =
σ∈ Gal(HR /K)
Obviously, zR = yR .
For proper divisors, we have the following lemma:
Q
Lemma 7.7. [3] For all positive divisors D of R, define bD = aq ,
q|R/D
where the product is taken over all primes q dividing R/D. Then we
have
zD = bD yD
In particular, bD = 0 whenever q1 does not divide D, because aq1 = 0

(Since q1 is a sensitive supersingular prime).
Proof. Let M be any positive integer prime to C and let p be a prime

number with (p, M C) = 1 and p inert in K, Let HM be the ring class
field of K conductor M . And HM p ring class field of conductor M p.
Then by the general fact first observed by Kolyvagin, we have:
T rHM p /HM f (PM p ) = ap f (PM )
Let D be any positive proper divisor of R prime to C such that (q, CD) =
1 where q√is a prime in R − D and we know q is inert in K. Now we
know K( D) is contained in HD , then the assertion easily follows from
the above fact:

Y X
(7.8) bD yD = aq f (PD )σ
q|R/D σ∈ Gal(HD /HD )
Y X
(7.9) = aq f (PD )σ
q|R/D σ∈ Gal(HD /HD )
X Y
(7.10) = aq f (PD )σ
σ∈ Gal(HD /HD ) q|R/D
X
(7.11) = σ(T rHR /HD f (PR ))
σ∈ Gal(HD /HD )
0
X X
(7.12) = σ( f (PR )σ )
σ∈ Gal(HD /HD ) σ 0 ∈ Gal(HR /HD )
X
(7.13) = f (PR )σ
σ∈ Gal(HR /HD )
X
(7.14) = f (PR )σ
√
σ∈ Gal(HR /K( D))
(7.15) = zD

Now we are ready to prove our assertions about the Heegner point
yR . It is convenient to assume that T = f ([0]) is of exact order 2.
This can always be done by composing f with multiplication by an
odd integer on E, and we shall assume for the rest of the proof that
we have done this. Define
f (PR )σ
P
ψR =
σ∈ Gal(HR /HR )
We recall from the theorem of Birch f (P wC ) + f (P ) = T for all points

P on X0 (C) as = −1 which means we assumed the root number of
L(E, s) to be +1. We know from the first lemma that [HR : HR ] is odd,
and T is a point in E(Q) of order 2, we can deduce from the second
lemma (wC P(HR ) = τ P(HR )) that:
ψ R + ψR = T
We first suppose r = 1, so that R = q1 and let σ denote the non trivial
√
element of Gal(K( q1 )/K). Then
yr = ψR − σ(ψR )
. Since q1 is singular, we observe as before that aq1 = 0. So, if we take
D = 1, we get bD = 0 in the third lemma above which futher implies
that zD = 0. Thus,
ψR + σ(ψR ) = 0
Adding the above two equations, we get,
(7.16) yR = 2ψR
(7.17) ⇒yR + yR = 2(ψR + ψ R )
(7.18) ⇒yR + yR = 2T = 0
(7.19) ⇒yR = yR
as T is of order 2. Now since yR = 2ψR , we note that yR + σ(yR ) = 0.
This means that
σ(yR ) = y R .
This means that the point yR is mapped to its negative by √the non
√
trivial element of the Galois group of K( q1 )/K in E(Q( −l0 R).
√
Thus √ yR ∈ E(Q( −l0 R)− which is the subgroup those points of
E(Q( −l0 R) which are mapped to their negative. Now √ suppose we can
write a heegner point yR = 2w + t where w ∈ E(Q( −l0 R)− and t is a
torsion point. This implies that ψR = w + t0 where t0 lies in E(HR )[2∞ ].
But we know from the first lemma that E(HR√)[2∞ ] = E(Q)[2]. Thus
we get t0 ∈ E(Q)[2]. This means ψR ∈ E(Q( −l0 R)− which implies
ψR + ψ R = 0
which means that√T = 0 and contradicts
√ the fact that order of
√ T is 2.
Thus √yR ∈ E(Q( −l0 R)− +E(Q( −l0 R)tor and yR ∈ / 2E(Q( −l0 R)− +
E(Q( −l0 R)tor . This proves our assertion for r=1. Now suppose that
r > 1. Let y1 = T rHR /HR f (PR ) and for any positive divisor D of R
divisible by q1 , let zD = T rHR /K(√D) f (PR ). Then the points zD and y1
are related by the following relation
zD = 2r y1 ∀ r > 1
P
q1 |D|R
It immediately follows from the above formula and our case r = 1,
that:
zD = 2r ψR
P
yR +
D|R,D6=R
because yR = zR as seen before. If D 6= R, we can write bD = 2r eD for
some integer eD . This follows from the fact that aq ≡ 0 mod 2r . Now
as zD = bD yD by the lemma above, we get:
yR = 2r uR with uR = ψR −
P
eD yD
D|R,D6=R
Also we know bD = 0 if q1 does not √divide D which√ means eD = 0. It
follows that the class of yR in E(K( R))/2r E(K R) maps to zero in
E(HR )/2r E(HR ). But we have the inflation restriction exact sequence:
√ √
0 → H 1 (Gal(HR /K( R)), E(HR )[2r ]) → H 1 (K( R), E[2r ]) →
H 1 (HR , E[2r ])
and the kernel of the left of this sequence is killed by 2, because,
as mentioned
√ before, E(HR )[2∞ ] = √E(Q[2]). It follows that 2yR ∈
r
2 E(K( R)) for some y ∈ E(K( R)) and t ∈ E(Q)[2]. Then
2r uR = 2r−1 y + t. This gives y = 2ur√+ s for some s ∈ E(Q)[2]. We
want to show that y belongs to E(Q( −l0 R))− .
√ √ √
Let σ ∈ Gal(HR /K) that maps q1 to − q1 , and fixes all qi for
2 ≤ i ≤ r. We claim that:
σ(y) + y = 0
Now ψR = T rHR /HR f (PR ) and
σ(ψR ) + ψR = T rHR /K(√q2 ,..,√qr ) f (PR ) = 0
as aq1 = 0. If eD 6= 0, then D is a positive
√ divisor of R that is divisible
by q1 . Thus the restriction of σ to K( D) must be a non-trivial element
of the Galois group of this field over K, and so
yD = vD − σ(vD )
where vD = T rHD /K(√D) f (PD ). But since q1 |D and aq1 = 0, we have
vD + σ(vD ) = 0
Adding the above two equations, we get:
(7.20) yD = 2vD
(7.21) ⇒σ(yD ) + yD = 0
P
Now y = 2uR + s and uR = ψR − eD yD , and from above we
D|R,D6=R
have:
σ(ψR ) + ψR = 0 and σ(yD ) + yD = 0
Thus, it follows that
σ(y) + y = 0
Next we claim that y +y = 0. Consider all those divisors D of R, which
are not equal to R and for which eD 6= 0. We assert that:
yD + y D = 0
√
For those D just mentioned, K( D) is a subfield of HD which is a
subfield of R and since (wC P(HR ) = τ P(HR )), we have:
ψD + ψ D = T
that vD +vD = 0 Now ψD = T rHD /HD f (PD ) and vD = T rHD /K(√D) f (PD )
√
but K( D) is a subfield of HD . This implies that
(7.22) vD + vD = T
(7.23) ⇒ 2(vD + vD ) = 0
(7.24) ⇒ yD + yD = 0
(7.25) ⇒ uR + uR = ψR + ψ R
(7.26) ⇒y+y =0
(7.27) ⇒ σ(y) = y
p
(7.28) ⇒ y ∈ E(Q( −l0 R))−
p
(7.29) ⇒ yR ∈ 2r−1 E(Q( −l0 R))− + E(Q)[2]
√
Now √suppose yR = 2r y 0 + t with y 0 ∈ E(Q( −l0 R))− and t ∈
E(Q( −l0 R))tor . √Let m denote an odd integer that annihilates the
odd part of E(Q( −l0 R))tor , we then have
m(ψR − y 0 − eD yD ) ∈ E(HR )[2∞ ] = E(Q)[2]
P
D|R,D6= R
It follows that m(ψR + ψR ) = 0 which implies T has odd√order which

is a contradiction
√ as T has order 2. Thus, yR ∈/ 2r E(Q( −l0 R))− +
E(Q( −l0 R))tor . This completes the proof of this theorem.
Corollary 7.8. [3] Under the same hypothesis as in the theorem proved
above, for all R = q1 ...qr with r ≥ 1 we have that:
• the complex L-series of E (R) does not vanish at s = 1, and both
E (R) (Q) and the Tate-Shafarevich group of E (R) are finite, and
• the complex L-series of E (−l0 R) has a simple zero at s = 1,
E (−l0 R) (Q) has rank 1, and the Tate-Shafarevich group of E (−l0 R)
is finite.
Proof. Since yR has infinite order, it follows from the Special Case of
Explicit Gross and Zagier formula applied current the hypothesis that
L(E/K, χR , s) must have a simple zero at s = 1. But as seen before:
L(E/K, χR , s) = L(E (−l0 R) , s) L(E (R) , s).
By hypothesis we have, C is a square modulo every prime dividing l0 R,

R ≡ 1 mod 4, l0 R ≡ 3 mod 4, and we know that the root number of
L(E, s) is +1 ( = −1), then:

(7.30) wE wE (R) = (wE )2 χR (−C)
(7.31) = χR (−C)
(7.32) = χR (−1)χR (C)
(7.33) = (−1/R)(C/R) (Jacobi Symbol)
R−1
(7.34) = (−1) 2 (C/q1 )...(C/qr )
4n + 1 − 1
(7.35) = (−1) 2 .1
(7.36) =1
Thus, wE (R) = 1
(7.37) wE wE (−l0 R) = (wE )2 χ−l0 R (−C)

(7.38) = χ−l0 R (−C)
(7.39) = χ−l0 R (−1)χ−l0 R (C)
(7.40) = (−1/l0 R)(C/l0 R) (Jacobi Symbol)
l0 R − 1
(7.41) = (−1) 2 (C/q1 )...(C/qr )(C/l0 )
4m + 3 − 1
(7.42) = (−1) 2 .1
(7.43) = −1
Thus wE (−l0 R) = −1.
Thus we must have L(E (R) , 1) 6= 0 and that L(E (−l0 R) , s) has a sim-
ple zero at s = 1. Then from the context of the theorem of Kolyvagin-
Gross-Zagier, we get both E (R) (Q) and the Tate-Shafarevich group
of E (R) are finite as well as E (−l0 R) (Q) has rank 1, and the Tate-
Shafarevich group ofPE (−l0 R) is finite.
Note that, since R is infinite when r ≥ 2, we have proved the
assertion of the theorem we intended to prove in this section for k ≥
2.
References
[1] Avner Ash & Robert Gross, Elliptic Tales: Curves, Counting, and Number
Theory
[2] John Coates, Lectures on the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer Conjecture, Em-
manuel College, University of Cambridge, and POSTECH
[3] John Coates, Yongxiong Li, Ye Tian and Shuai Zhai, Quadratic Twists of Ellip-
tic Curves, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society Advance Access
published December 6, 2014.
[4] Karl Rubin and Alice Siverberg, Ranks of Elliptic Curves, Bulletin (New Series)
of The American mathematical Society, Volume 39, Number 4, Pages 455474-
July 8, 2002.
[5] Joseph H. Silverman, The Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves
[6] Susanne Schmitt and Horst G. Zimmer, Elliptic Curves- A Computational Ap-
proach
[7] John Cremona, Numerical evidence for the BirchSwinnerton-Dyer Conjecture,
University of Warwick at the BSD conference, Cambridge-4 May 2011.
[8] Li Cai, Jie Shu, and Ye Tian, Explicit Gross Zagier and Waldspurger Formula
[9] Kenneth Ireland, Michael Ira Rosen, A Classical Introduction to Modern Num-
ber Theory
[10] Hendrik Lenstra, The Chebotarev Density Theorem
[11] Adam Mickiewicz, Average Ranks of Elliptic Curves, Based on Mini-course by
Prof. Tim Dokchister, University in Poznan, 14 16.05.2014, Notes taken by
Jedrzej Garnek.
[12] Allison Arnold-Roksandich, Christopher Towse-Advisor, Michael E. Orrison-
Reader, There and Back Again: Elliptic Curves, Modular Forms, and L-
Functions, Department of Mathematics, Harvey Mudd College, May 2014.
[13] Lecture notes for the Part III course (2004-5) Elliptic Curves, University of
Warwick.
[14] Ye Tian, Congruent numbers and Heegner Points, arxiv:1210.8231v1
[math.NT]
[15] Francesca Gala, Prof. Jan Nekovar, Heegner points on X0 (N ), Universita Degli
Studi Di Milano , Facolta di Scienze Matematiche, Fisiche e Naturali ‘ Corso di
Laurea in Matematica.
[16] B.Gross, Heegner points on X0 (N ), Modular Forms (ed. R.A. Rankin; Ellis
Horwood, Chichester, 1984)
[17] John T. Tate, The Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves, Cambridge Mass, Inventiones
math, Vol. 23.
Acknowledgements. I would like to thank my essay supervisor

Professor J.H.Coates for his constant support and guidance.

Note For The Reader

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Note For The Reader

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Note for the Reader:

Abstract. This paper explains the precise statement of the Con-

1. Elliptic Curves over Q

Date: 28, April 2015.

Since elliptic curve is of genus 1 with a fixed base point O, by Rie-

Definition 1.5 (Discriminant). Let E be an elliptic curve over Q given

Definition 1.6 (J-Invariant). We define the j invariant as the quantity

Rank of an Elliptic Curve.

There is no proven algorithm guaranteed to determine rank(E). It

Reduction modulo p. Consider a finite field Fp . Counting points on

Example 1.9. [12] Consider the curve:

We can ask, ’How big is E(Q)?’. Equivalently we can ask, ’How

Definition 1.10 (Minimal Weierstrass Equation). Consider the Weier-

y 2 + a¯1 xy + a¯3 y = x3 + a¯2 x2 + a¯4 x + a¯6 over Fp .

Φ = {P = (x, y) ∈ E(Q)|P has finite order}

Then, we define the reduction modulo p map as:

Then Φ is a homomorphism and is an isomorphism if p 6 |2∆.

2. The Conjecture of Birch and Swinnerton Dyer

We observe that if E is singular, then E := y 2 = x3 + Ax2 . So our

Dirichlet Series and L-function of an Elliptic curve.

where s is a complex variable.

Definition 2.4 (Hasse-Weil L Function:). We define the Hasse-Weil

Theorem 2.6 (Wiles). The holomorphic function fE (τ ) is a primitive

This gives us the required functional equation. The root number wE

We now let x → ∞. From all this guess work, we get an idea

This equation says how fast L(E, s) tends to zero as s → 1 might be

The Weak Birch and Swinnerton Dyer Conjecture. Let E be

The Strong Parity Conjecture. Let E be an elliptic curve defined

Results from Galois Cohomology. [5]Let E(Q) and E 0 (Q) be two

Let v run over places2 of field Q. Then Qv denotes completions of Q

The group of all automorphisms of the algebraic closure of K that

Tate-Shafarevich group. The Tate-Shafarevich group consists of el-

The φ-torsion of the Tate-Shafarevich group is the subgroup of H 1 (G, E)[φ]

φ-Selmer group. We define the φ-Selmer group by

Note that S φ (E | Q) is actually equal to jφ−1 III(E | Q)[φ]. In ap-

2Equivalence classes of valuation of Q.

Corollary 3.2. The parity of tE,p is independent of p.

To some extent, we have the following classification of wE|Qp :

Definition 4.1 (Neron-Tate Height). Let E(Q) be an elliptic curve

5Positive definiteness ⇒ R∞ (E) 6= 0.

Conjecture: For all elliptic curves E(Q), we have

5. Work of Kolyvagin and Gross Zagier

Hence we conclude that the part 2 of the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer

Numerical Evidence for Birch and Swinnerton Dyer

L(E, 1)/Ω(E) 1/5

the generators are (15,-7),(16,-16) and (19,20) with R∞ (E) =

Again Birch and Swinnerton Dyer conjecture holds when III(E|

Again Birch and Swinnerton Dyer conjecture holds when III(E|

for all rational numbers a, b, and c. If a solution exists, then n is called

Example 6.4. Let n be a squarefree positive integer. Let E (N ) :

Quadratic Twists of Elliptic Curves

Then Twist((E, O)(K)) is canonically isomorphic to K ∗ /K ∗n .

y 2 = x3 + ad2 x + bd3 . It will be convenient to make the change of

Conjecture: (Goldfeld) If wE (d) = +1, then L(E (d) , 1) 6= 0 out-

Let C(E) be the conductor of E. Γ0 (C(E)) denotes the congruence

{x, y}Γ ∈ H1 (XΓ , Q)

We prove this theorem in the next section.

7. Generalisation of Birch’s Lemma

(1) (M, C) = 1 and no prime divisor p of C is inert20 in K, and

7.1. Special Case of Explicit Gross Zagier Formula. Let E be

Theorem 7.1 (Birch). [3] Let E be an elliptic curve defined over Q

(7.1) wE wE (−l0 ) = (wE )2 χ−l0 (−C)

Sensitive Supersingular Prime. We define q1 to be a sensitive su-

L(E, s) is +1 ( = −1), then: